From: | Sergiy Vyshnevetskiy <serg(at)vostok(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #2948: default null values for not-null domains |
Date: | 2007-02-01 21:51:32 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0702012234230.22446@uanet.vostok.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Sergiy Vyshnevetskiy <serg(at)vostok(dot)net> writes:
>> If input function IS strict then nulls are ALWAYS accepted.
>> If input function IS NOT strict then nulls MIGHT be rejectted.
>> And the patch is much more simple now (attached).
>> Is that it?
>
> Almost right. exec_assign_value() thinks its isNull argument is the
> null flag for the *source* value (not sure why it's pass by reference).
Because the value may change during type cast. From null to non-null too.
Or vice-versa. I'll try it later.
> As you set it up, var->isnull would be aliased by *isNull, which might
> manage to break things within that function if the code were ever
> rearranged.
>
> Also, some comments are usually a good idea (if the purpose were
> obvious, it'd have been right the first time, no?),
I will, when I'm sure what I'm doing. For now it's mostly "mokey see -
monkey do".
> and you always need to check the regression tests --- it turns out that
> the wrong behavior was actually being exposed by the tests.
Hmm? Oh, yeah, I /heard/ something about them ... I think. :)
> Patch as-applied is attached.
Excellent. Thanks.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-02 02:17:51 | Re: BUG #2953: index scan, feature request |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-01 19:35:17 | Re: BUG #2954: null is not checked against domain constraints in return clause |